79
79
Mar 26, 2013
03/13
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 79
favorite 0
quote 0
tosome of them only apply doma. and understand what you mean by uniformity, but it is for the justification of the defense of marriage act. >> by uniformity -- ? >> as i a understand it, for simplicity sake, the federal government does not want to discern between different gay couples and they want to treat them equally as bad. as unmarried. >> there are lots of gay couples that which they were married and are not married and not get all the benefits of treatment by the federal government. in other words, in order to treat all same-sex couples as unmarried, we will treat them all the same. >> what congress said in the defense of marriage act is that -- the interest here is making sure that a married couple in texas is treated the some -- the same as a married couple in massachusetts. so that it is uniform throughout. >> there are two categories of married people, those that get in and those who do not. we are distinguishing would sheen -- distinguishing between married couples. and they want there to be uniform trea
tosome of them only apply doma. and understand what you mean by uniformity, but it is for the justification of the defense of marriage act. >> by uniformity -- ? >> as i a understand it, for simplicity sake, the federal government does not want to discern between different gay couples and they want to treat them equally as bad. as unmarried. >> there are lots of gay couples that which they were married and are not married and not get all the benefits of treatment by the...
149
149
Mar 25, 2013
03/13
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 149
favorite 0
quote 0
doma is complicated because it does provide protection for the states from the federal government part of it federalizes the issue. there is a chance the court could strike down the federalization part of it. if they do i think the way to fix it is maybe to try to make all of the laws more neutral towards the issue. i don't want the government promoting something i don't believe in you but i don't mind if the government tries to be neutral on the issue. i'm for a flat income tax and we wouldn't have marriage as part of the tax code. health insurance there is a way to write it where it would be neutral and you wouldn't bring marriage into the idea of health insurance chris i want to -- >> chris: i want to go back to the filibuster. after you filibustered for 13 hours you got this letter from the attorney general in which he wrote does the president have the authorization to kill an american with a drone to kill an american not engaged in combat on american soil just is answer to that is no. it seems to me what attorney general holder is saying by implication is that the president does h
doma is complicated because it does provide protection for the states from the federal government part of it federalizes the issue. there is a chance the court could strike down the federalization part of it. if they do i think the way to fix it is maybe to try to make all of the laws more neutral towards the issue. i don't want the government promoting something i don't believe in you but i don't mind if the government tries to be neutral on the issue. i'm for a flat income tax and we wouldn't...
159
159
Mar 24, 2013
03/13
by
KTVU
tv
eye 159
favorite 0
quote 0
the other case, doma, defense of marriage act which basically says the federal government will not allow benefits for couples who in their states have been legally married. >> i think that is a much harder problem, not just for the court but for conservatives, and i've made the point in december. i believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. i believe in fact that pope francis's arguments, on relativism are powerful but i believe there are fax on the ground. and, one of the facts is going to be, the state says we are going to limit marriage between a man and woman but, by the way, american citizens visit from a different state. now, what happens to that situation? i mean, i think we are now going to be muddled and i think for the health of country it is better to have the muddle in the legislative bodies and politics than it is to have it cut through by five people on a 5-4 vote. >> chris: we should point out it is interesting, i didn't realize this: the case that is going before the court involves a woman, a lesbian who was involved for many years in a marriage, her partner died
the other case, doma, defense of marriage act which basically says the federal government will not allow benefits for couples who in their states have been legally married. >> i think that is a much harder problem, not just for the court but for conservatives, and i've made the point in december. i believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. i believe in fact that pope francis's arguments, on relativism are powerful but i believe there are fax on the ground. and, one of the facts...
109
109
Mar 25, 2013
03/13
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 109
favorite 0
quote 0
justices will also consider the 1996 defense of marriage act or doma that prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages. the central claim in both cases is that plaintiffs were denied equal protection of the law. later today a panel of attorneys who have been active in the debate and litigation will give a preview of what to expect by the high court. the event is hosted by george washington university law school, and you can see it live beginning at 4 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> tonight on "first ladies," called a bigamist and adulterer, rachel jackson dies of an apparent heart attack before andrew jackson takes office. his niece, emily donaldson, becomes the white house hostess but is later dismissed as fallout from a scandal. and during the next administration, angelica van buren is the white house hostess for her father-in-law, president martin van buren, who is a widower. of live tonight at 9 eastern on c-span and c-span3, also on c-span radio and c-span.org. >> a hearing now by a house foreign affairs subcommittee on the threat of hezbollah, the lebanon-based islamic militant
justices will also consider the 1996 defense of marriage act or doma that prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages. the central claim in both cases is that plaintiffs were denied equal protection of the law. later today a panel of attorneys who have been active in the debate and litigation will give a preview of what to expect by the high court. the event is hosted by george washington university law school, and you can see it live beginning at 4 p.m. eastern on c-span. >>...
134
134
Mar 20, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 134
favorite 0
quote 0
gop and the bipartisan legal counsel to continue this fight, $3 million of taxpayer money to oppose doma? >> well, look, this is a position of our party. but, you know, our point in the report, luke, is that, you know, when i was asked at the national press club i think one of the reporters asked me and he said are you still going to fund, you know, rob portman? my response is, of course we're going to help rob portman. he's a good conservative republican. my appointment, luke, i'm not going to get into this sort of back and forth with leadership, but what i will tell you is i think our party needs to have the attitude that if i disagree with you on one issue, it doesn't mean that you're a lousy republican. it means that you're a good republican. it means we agree on most issues and we need to unite our party. we can't build our party if we're going to cut out certain pieces and certain parts that we may not agree on 100% on but we have to grow. so we have to grow through additional -- >> mr. chairman, you're a relatively young man, 41 years old. do you think the republican party -- >> i
gop and the bipartisan legal counsel to continue this fight, $3 million of taxpayer money to oppose doma? >> well, look, this is a position of our party. but, you know, our point in the report, luke, is that, you know, when i was asked at the national press club i think one of the reporters asked me and he said are you still going to fund, you know, rob portman? my response is, of course we're going to help rob portman. he's a good conservative republican. my appointment, luke, i'm not...